The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-01-28
| THE BELL TELRPHOSECASE
THE SUPREME COURT ROOM
GRO KDRD WITH PEOPLE
Who Desired to Hear the Arguments
Before Justice Miller-PI0f.
Bells CroOkedness.

Bells CroOkedness.
WAsHISGToE, Janusry 81. - TIL,
United States Supreme Court ron
was crowded this mor1ing when tn,
Court reassembled to continue thu
hearing in the argument in the tele
phone cases, for it was understood tina
Mr.. Hill, for the Overland and Peo
pies Companies, would present the
charges Of fraud in the procurement
Of the Bell patent. He began by as
str!iDg that Prof. Bel had changed
the specifications of his patent while
his application was pending. He wst
proceeding to explain why these
changes were made aud why in hii
judgment they amounted to q ir Iud,
when he was Interrupted by Justice
Miller, who inquired whether it wat
not custom OF inventors to change the
specifications while the application
was pending. AS he understood II,
inventors in such cases always tried to
improve their specifications and make
them as perfect es possible before the
application wss acted upon. Mr.. Hill
replied that up to certain limits that
was true, but not after the specifica-
tions had been definitely fixed and
sworn to. Hs then proceeded ~ argue
that the changes alleged in this cssa
had been made after Prof. B II had
surreptitiously obtained knowledge Of
the contents Of eaveat filed by Prof.
Elisha Gray, and that the changes
y ere intended to include in his prof.
Beps) patent Inventions which he
himself had not made, but which he
had wrongfully appropriated from the
caveat OF Prof. Gray.
At this point Mr.. Hill was again in
teuupted by Justice Miller, who in
quired: "Do l understand that you
propose to set up fraud as a defense in
this cause and to attack the patent on
that ground2"
M. Hill-We do not plead fraud as
a defence, but this is court OF equity,
and when the com olainans come here
ard aEk for equity they must dc
equity-they must como with clean
hands.
Justics Miller-It has been repeat.
eddy held that patent cannot be at
tackled for fraud in this court unless
there has besn a separate and valid
proceeding upon that ground in the
courts bslow--a proceeding in which
the issue Of fraud has been distinctly
made.
Mr.. Hill replied that il the Court re-
fused to hear allegations OF fraud he
would, of course, proceed no further
with this part of his argument.
Mr.. Ju ,tice Harlan said that, speak
ing for himself, he thought counsel
should be allowed to proceed with h
argument In the manner in which he
had planned it.
Mr.. Justice Bradley agreed with THU
view Of the case, and said that II the
argument should be found 10 raise
questions which it was not proper for
the court to consider at this time, il
would not be diste yarded. Hs was
in flvor OF allowing Mr.. Hill to pro-
coed.
Mr.. Hill then resum ed his argument
He maintained, frst, that in Februa.
ry, 1875, after Prof. Bell had fled his
application for q patent, he surreptl.
tiously obtained, through Examiner
Wilbut's room in the Patent Office, in
formation with regard to the contents
of a csveat Fl ed by Prof. Elisha Gray
to protect tslepnonic process invent
ed by him; that Prof. Bell awaited
himself of the knowledge thus obi ain.
ed to amend aud widen his own speci-
fications SO az to include many OF the
features of Prof. Grsy's invention
Second, that between February IA and
February 10. 1879, Pollok & Bailey,
Bells patent attorneys, "in conse'
quence Of the guilty knowledge which
they had of the contents OF Gray's Ca
veat, bodily interpolstsd an important
invention and q claim therefor in
Bells specifications" AS proof oil
such fraudulent Interpolation Mr..
Hill referred to two documents, one 9
copy of Prof. Bells specifications
which was given, in January, 1876, ia
George Brown, to be taken to England
for the purpose of obtaining a patent
there, aad the other a certified copy oil
the interlined and interpolated specl-
fications, which had, at one time, been
on file in the Patent Office, but which
be said, Prof. Bell, or his
attorneys by collision with the en-
ployes OF the Patent Office, and subse'
Quently removed had destroyed to
conceal the fraudulent iuterp olations,
substituting for those clean copy in
which the interlineations had been In
corporsted. He maintained that the
George Brown copy Of the specifics
tons was the original form in which
they were filed that the ceitifi cd copy
OF the specifications obtained from the
Patent Office in 1879 and used as ar
exhibit in the Dowd case, showing az
It did thirty nine alterations and inter
lineations, was the next stsp in til,
fraud, and that such fraud had been
consummated by the abstraction o
this interpolated and interlined copy
from the files Of the Patent Office anC
the substitution cf a clean copy some
time between 1879, when the trans
ipt used in the Dowd case was made
and in 1885, when it was discovered
tina, this transcript had disappeared
aud a clean copy purp orting to be the
original had been put in it's place.
| Mr. Sorrow replied for the Ameri
can Bell Telephone Company, and IL
defense OF Prof. B1ll. He devoted
himself first to an attempt to chow
that such changes as had been mad
in Prof, Bells specifications after the
George Brown copy had been sent t
England vera changes which he haC
perfect legal right to make ; that they
were made in due time, and that they
had no relation whatever to the GRAY
caveat, but were the results OF Prot
Bells independent thinking. H,
then took up the subject Of the inter
lined and interpolsted copy of Prof
Bells specifications, which Mr.. Hill
alleged had been obtained in its pres
emit snaps from the Patent Office IL
1879, and upon which the charges o
fraud had beea mainly based. Mr.
Storrow said he could explain TO tn,
court in a very few words the Origin
OF the so called changes, interlines
tons and interpretations in this docu
ment, upon the strength of which
Prof Bell had been charged with